Tag Archives: shia

Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong. 1 Corinthians 16:13

I keep getting emails praising this or that Islam “expert” who rages against Islam per se and holds up Israel as a shining light in a world of darkness (see below). But these experts don’t mean Israel, they mean the war hawk Likud party which seeks to invade Iran to enlarge its elbow room, using false narratives of the “threat” posed by Tehran. Yet Likud does not equal Israel and for that matter, the Israel of today is not the Israel of antiquity that God blessed. God banished those Israelites from their land when they turned their backs on Him. Pray tell, in view of the fact that only a fraction of Israelis believe in the God of Abraham, when have they turned godly again? A while back I asked a “Zionist Christian” friend that question and never heard back from him.

Unfortunately, though, the vast majority of these people who “enlighten” us about Islam make no distinction between Sunni and Shia, and yet such distinction is one of the vital facts any real expert would know and teach. The reason for this is political. Every single ISIS member is SUNNI and belongs to the most violent and intolerant religious sect in the world, the SUNNI sect of Wahhabism, a product of the Saudi dictatorship to which Washington bows. Not just the Democrats. ALL of Washington.

EVERY single Al-Qaeda member, including Osama bin Laden, is also a SUNNI Wahhabist, and so is EVERY single Taliban member.

BTW, this is not to say that all Sunnis are dangerous or potentially so. Consider that Sunni-majority Indonesia has the highest Muslim population of any country, and yet we almost never hear of terror acts committed by Indonesians against Westerners (though Shia-Sunni rifts are common), and yet, most of them are Sunni. This is because modernist Islam (a moderate Islam heavily influenced by Islamic thinkers influenced in turn by the West) predominates there, where the government is generally secularist – just as the governments of Assad, Saddam Hussein and Ghadaffi are or were secularist, and terrorists, for example, are or were not tolerated. It is, of course, no coincidence that the West has opposed these secularists, paying obeisance to the Saudis and their zeal to spread Islam by the sword. No surprise. But no excuse either.

Despite the relative moderation of the Shiites compared to the Sunnis in the Middle East, as described above, for purely political reasons, it is de rigueur to claim that Shiite IRAN is the biggest terror supporter in the world.

To add to the utter absurdity of the official Western narrative, Iran is fighting ISIS in Syria. Of course, these same “enlighteners” regarding Islam never dare mention that Assad, the man we are supposed to hate, is also a Shiite, of the Alawite sect, or that the Alawites are by far the most tolerant and non-violent of all Muslims and are hated by the Saudis for it. The Western call to oust Assad is just a genuflection toward the tyrannical Saudis with whom the US is joined at the hip for reasons discussed in part here and here.

Anyone who tries to create the impression that Iran is a threat to civilization is simply caving to the Neocons who gave the world near-total chaos in the Middle East. No matter what the consequences, this myth must be broken. Nothing is more important. If anyone tries to sell you this swill, ask them to name ONE terror attack in Europe or the US that was perpetrated by Iranians or Hezbollah.

The notion that ALL MUSLIMS are evil and dangerous in fact plays into the narrative of the Neocons, who use this simplistic notion of a monolithic, heterogeneous Islam to wage war strictly against the SHIITES, precisely the branch of Islam that is fighting ISIS. After all, if All Muslims are equally dangerous and evil, then we have a mandate to destroy Iran and Assad as well, and that is exactly what they want you to believe. We often hear from our kindly, enlightened Christian conservative friends: Kill them all and let God sort them out.

But the fact is, NEVER in a million years would the world be able to rid itself of the Saudi-supported ISIS if no one ever challenged the ALL-MUSLIMS-ARE-EVIL myth. Because without the “evil” Iranians and the “evil” Assad, Syria would still be in the grip of ISIS, which, may I remind the reader, would not be there had it not been for wholehearted Western support for the Arab Spring and subsequent arms and support supplied to the “moderates” by US war enthusiasts. Needless to say, all of the moderates are Sunni Wahhabists.

Part of this challenge is NEVER to give credence to those who support the anti-Iran myths. Unfortunately, the myth is supported by BOTH sides of the aisle in Washington and by many intellectually lazy Americans, both conservative and liberal, who are waiting patiently under the table for the Washington Establishment to someday throw them a few scraps as long as they don’t meddle in the State Department’s meddling. ONLY Russia challenges this myth and fights alongside the Shiites in their war against the SUNNI terror supported clandestinely by the US and EU governments.

Ironically, US foreign policy today is in the hands of people who rail against political correctness, but these are precisely the ones who by their actions support the SUNNI radical Saudi Arabia while making the absolutely false and dangerous claim that IRAN is the biggest terror supporter. (So please, put aside your cheerleading role and don your watchdog hat).

Ask yourself: Are you REALLY politically incorrect or is your mind being controlled by a gigantic hoax even as you cheer on the ringleaders?

I regularly receive propaganda pieces from various organizations with assertions representing a very common viewpoint among Neocons, worded essentially as follows:

The recent sham and highly dangerous deal with Iran over its nuclear weapons development is proof enough that the president sides with “his people” over not just Israel but also the rest of we [sic] real Americans.

In fact, this nuclear deal with Iran shows that Obama is not a Muslim. Since he was brought up in Sunni Indonesia (99% of Indonesian Muslims are Sunnis), then if he took seriously the religion in which he was steeped, “his people” would be Sunnis, the enemies of Shiite Iran. The Muslim world is dominated by the Saudis, the Gulf states and Turkey, all of which are SUNNIS, the arch enemies of Iran, which is predominantly Shiite.

Iran is the only fully SHIA-majority country in the world. The Sunnis are responsible for all terror attacks and populate ISIS, Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, Boko Haram, Al-Nusra and all throat slitting anti-Christian terror groups. Unlike the Iranian SHIA, the Sunnis, especially the Wahhabi sect, believe that all non-Sunnis must convert or die. Iran obviously does not support this concept.

The Sunnis rarely attack Israel, which sometimes has collaborated with the Islamic terrorist group Al-Nusra, for ex, in the Golan Heights. There is apparently a symbiotic relationship between Israel and terrorist groups, as shown here and here.

According to the theorists who believe Obama is a Muslim, he would be a Sunni, and indeed, he bowed before the Sunni king of Saudi Arabia and was also enrolled in a Sunni Muslim school in Indonesia.

Yet he has made this nuclear deal with the Shia in Iran which could theoretically enable Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon. This is a real puzzle for those who postulate that Obama is a Muslim but not for normal rational people.

I suspect Obama has in fact been influenced by his most intimate advisor Valerie Jarrett, who grew up in Iran. I do not think there is any further explanation for this. The Saudis are livid over this deal.

Further, no devout Muslim would promote the homosexual agenda as Obama does.

The problem with Obama is not that he is a Muslim but that he belongs to the New World Order that seeks to eliminate white America and traditional American culture, especially Christianity. Some of the people behind the Obama-is-Muslim meme are seeking precisely the same goal.

Today’s situation in the Middle East is very confusing to the uninitiated because US policy is secretly based on a decivilizing and disordering strategy that, to survive, must masquerade as being beneficial to all and designed to bring peace and justice. A major challenge for deceitful policy makers. For example, Obama originally had decided not to send arms and troops to the Syrian “rebels,” but when he saw the Russians bombing rebel bases, he decided to send more troops and arms (perhaps to appease the Neocons or perhaps because he has become one), as reported here.

A few months ago Ted Cruz addressed a group of Syrian Christians living in the US. Like many naive Americans, he assumed that the Middle East Jews and Christians share the same plight and therefore sympathize with each other. However, the Christian-killing terrorists in Syria have the moral support of many Israelis and the Israeli government because these terrorists are, for now, also opposed to Hezbollah and Iran, which the Israelis see as enemies. This complexity is overwhelming for most Westerners because the pertinent dots are never connected in our media.

The ingenuous Cruz was surprised at these Christians’ hostile response when before this crowd of Syrian Christians, he repeated the shibboleth “I stand with Israel,” indicating that, like nearly all US politicians, he hasn’t a clue as to Syrian sentiments and the reality there. (Ben Carson, unlike Trump, also wants to ratchet up the cold war).

To state this reality as simply as possible, the Shiites (the Iranian people and the Syrian government–supported by Russia) are perceived as enemies of Israel while the Sunnis (essentially the Saudis, Gulf states and Turkey), who hate the Shia, are perceived as allies.

This unintentionally pits US supporters of Syrian Christians against Israel in the sense that to support these Christians, one naturally supports Russia’s efforts to defeat ISIS and the rebels, but Israel perceives Russia as a threat because she is defeating their Sunni “allies” in ISIS. Thus, when Israelis hear Americans sympathizing with the Syrian Christians, many of them tend to get nervous. On the other hand, US Christians and others who mouth the slogan “I stand for Israel” make Syrians nervous because this suggests that the person who says this is seen as a threat to the Syrian Christians and other minorities.

Thus far, geopolitically illiterate Western politicians (the vast majority) and by far the majority of US analysts, seem to think that not only are Sunnis and Shia irreconcilable, but that in the outside chance they could be brought together, their newfound unity could threaten US interests.

Yet they also perceive perpetual war to be in the US interest, a proposition that is counterintuitive and morally untenable. I have tried to explain here how this absurd and dangerous idea came about and why it has been perpetuated for a half-century with almost no opposition in politics and media.

So how can both sides be brought together?

Putin is an unrivaled statesman who obviously wants to do unite these enemies of long standing. He recognizes that the US-aggravated rivalry between the Sunnis and Israel on the one hand and the Shia and Russia on the other is untenable in the long run and will lead to war. He is clearly trying to defuse the tension nurtured by the US. While attacking the Syrian terrorists who have the tacit support of Israel, he has shown Israel his support by meeting with and speaking with Netanyahu and by agreeing with the latter to involve Russia in the extraction of the Leviathan gas deposit, part of which is claimed by Israel. This tacitly implies several important things:

1—Russia accepts Israel’s existence as a nation

2—Russia agrees with Israel’s claim to its share of Leviathan even though Israel has stretched international law by extending its waters from 12 miles to 200 miles to include the relevant part of the deposit.

3—Russia will not allow encroachment on this deposit during its extraction and will protect any portions of the pipeline that cross Israeli territory.

It is a virtual military protection agreement for Israel. Further, none of this will come as a surprise for Russia watchers of the non-Neocon variety because Putin had visited Israel years ago and gave a press conference relating to this trip in which his respect for the Jews and the people of all faiths is reflected. This video of the conference best illustrates the fact that Putin is by his very disposition a true uniter of peoples and a man of good will.

It was only a matter of time before Israel’s tenuous support of the Sunni terrorists would be discovered and would therefore backfire mightily.

The US and Israel were playing with fire by cultivating Sunni Saudis and, by extension, the Saudis’ pets in ISIS,as their main allies (with the US all the while pretending to fight ISIS for cosmetic purposes). They had set a trap for themselves that has now been sprung by Russia.

Russia is now the only country in the world that intends to bring the Sunni world – and its allies Israel and the US – and the Shia world – ie, the Iranian people and Syrian government – together as clearly suggested by this report showing that in September, Putin either spoke by phone or met with not only the Shia leaders of Iran and Syria but also their supposed arch enemies the leaders of the Sunni countries Palestine, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Jordan, and most amazingly, Israel. This convergence of the Middle East in Moscow represented nothing short of an epoch making plate shift but went almost completely unreported in the West, a benighted region which still seeks answers solely in policies that divide the Middle East and make it more barbaric, supposedly to benefit US interests but in fact to no one’s benefit.

After years and years of relentless brainwashing, the idea of a relatively peaceful Middle East is now alien to Americans, most of whom would scoff at the idea.

Putin, however, understands the commonality of these seemingly divergent peoples (if only based on economic expediency) and his effort to unite all of their leaders is by far the most ingenious, monumental and momentous peace effort ever attempted in the Middle East. Yet no one, not even the brightest and best of geopolitical analysts, seems to have noticed. They are too busy taking sides in an effort to prop up a falling empire.

Some will say that my analysis is weighted in favor of our one-time enemy Russia. Yet what I have shown suggests a happier ending for the US than most would admit to.

Putin continues to refer to the US as a partner, and if only for economic reasons, he is deadly serious about this.

Putin knows that an economically failed US does not favor Russia or its Eurasian partners, all of whom are seeking the greatest prosperity for all, if for no other reason than to benefit from trade with us. After all, what is the percentage in trading with poor countries?

This came in since I wrote the above and it substantiates my commentary: